KT archetype & organizing logic | Explorative dimension | Exploitative dimension | Strengths | Leadership challenges |
---|---|---|---|---|
Archetype A | Research governance maintained by academics yet they are accountable to a wider group of stakeholders; this can increase researcher absorptive capacity of service provider values and concerns. | Exploitation supported by seeking to shift the culture of research to integrate broader set of perspectives and stakeholders. | Increased stakeholder involvement enables integration of perspectives, thus suited to researching complex multidimensional problems. | Complexity of research and integration of (shifting) stakeholder agendas can increase the time needed to generate research outputs. |
Multi-stakeholder research to engage a wide range of perspectives | High exploratory focus maintains academic autonomy. | Wider research engagement enables research to be more relevant to users and increases their absorptive capacity, being more aware of research process. | Research includes the KT process, which may be done from multiple perspectives. | Brokering and negotiation needed across multiple stakeholder groups. |
Wider research agenda promotes research into implementation processes from multiple perspectives. | Engaging practitioners and health service providers in research increases their level of ownership, supporting the implementation of research findings; yet implementation process not formally controlled. | New culture of inclusive and multidisciplinary research can generate wider genre of research, beyond medical paradigm. | Risk of alienation and retreat to institutionalized silos of activity if boundaries are not actively managed, rather than sustaining new culture of multi-stakeholder research. |